Forums

SIM vs Human Coached Teams Topic

Note: This is not a whine...this is an observation of recent games and is an attempt to get some input to help the developers for the update.

SIMs beating human teams is an issue IMO. It is an issue in the current engine, and appears to be an issue in the updated engine. Today, my top 10 DIII team (with great talent, and great recent history...I've been there like 26 seasons or something like that) gets TOTALLY OUTPLAYED by a SIMAI in the first half. I did not get too excited, and did not make any changes to gameplan or lineup. Second half was a different story, and I dominated the SIM and pulled out a nice fairly lopsided win.

My summary is this: As human coaches we all know (or should know) the SIMAI gameplans. Therefore, we should be able to legitimately gameplan against the SIM and with only slightly more talent, GUARANTEE a win....every single time.

Here is the question for all of us coaches to help decide: What is the acceptable talent differential that would create an automatic win vs a SIM?

Perhaps if we can answer that question, or something along those lines, we can help the developers eliminate one of our many complaints/issues.

I am all for upsets, but it should never be a situation where the human team in harris' situation fails to show up at all. Upsets happen in the late part of the game, rarely will a Rice walk into Oklahoma and be up by 21 at half. Its the normalization that is killing both the engines. The upsets happen in the 4th quarter in a close game. I won't run the numbers but the upsets that happen in real life are things people can look at and say "Yeah, here is why this happened" upsets in this game have no cause or effect, it is just a blanket 10% or something.

Really I wouldn't have issue with a 75% talent to 25% gameplanning ratio. In real life established schools and coaches and successful schools do tend to have that type of approach. Everyone knows what Oklahoma is going to do on the field, but the talent is so different that it doesn't matter what you do for gameplanning.

Yes, will this make it rough on new people trying to get into positions of status? yes. HOWEVER, we have no new people signing up so lets just switch it to where the current players will be happy and you all can just bank on our paid seasons instead of working to get an extra two or three new people ($30) a month.

Yes, recently in both Stagg at My stacked Florida A&M team and in Yost my D-3 powerhouse colorado have both almost lost to sims. My Florida a&m team did and this is only recently. Not to mention the beta my team is rated top 5 and I beat every human coach but lost to 3 sims...******* ridiculous....The current engine is starting to upset me and I've only noticed this since Norbert left/ since the new engineers started...

One indication to me that something is wrong is the fact that if I am playing a sim, the first half and the second half do not reflect each other. If I can run over them in the first, why is it close in the second or vice versa. To me that shows the inconsistency in the engine and that ratings don't drive outcome. Even if 25% is game planning, why would the same game plan by both teams play lead to such differences in the outcome?

Posted by katzphang88 on 7/1/2013 11:47:00 AM (view original):One indication to me that something is wrong is the fact that if I am playing a sim, the first half and the second half do not reflect each other. If I can run over them in the first, why is it close in the second or vice versa. To me that shows the inconsistency in the engine and that ratings don't drive outcome. Even if 25% is game planning, why would the same game plan by both teams play lead to such differences in the outcome?

Not necessarily just against sims, but games in general (human vs human also) lately seem that the 1st half seems to keep the lesser talented team in the game or ahead, then the 2nd half the better team (on paper) takes over, regardless of set gameplan.